4) Leftists always try to hide their real identities, because they know how stupid their opinions make them look.

5) Leftists have no compassion for the most vulnerable in our society: infants and pregnant women. (Please explain to me: how is a baby at 8-months gestation any different if it is still in-utero, or prematurely born? And can there be no penalty in law for killing a fetus that, if the mother was not attacked violently, would have been carried to birth and nurtured to adulthood?)

If you give this miserable guy the recognition of a clickthrough, don’t leave without posting a comment, or without copying one of the Liberal e-mail links and thanking one of the righteous Lib MPs.

26 responses to “Sociopathic Blogger wants Liberal MPs who voted for C-484 “Marked for Political Death””

Leftists have no compassion for the most vulnerable in our society: infants and pregnant women. (Please explain to me: how is a baby at 8-months gestation any different if it is still in-utero, or prematurely born? And can there be no penalty in law for killing a fetus that, if the mother was not attacked violently, would have been carried to birth and nurtured to adulthood?)

I’ll explain it for you. It’s not so much that leftists don’t care about babies. It’s that they don’t want this law later being used as a way of criminalizing abortion the way it has happened so much in the U.S. Also, they don’t want every stillbirth (not to be confused with miscarriage) to be treated as a criminal investigation, again as it has in the U.S. once this kind of legislation is passed. On this one, I’m with the lefties.

What I suggest isn’t that the law separate the fetus from the mother, making the killing of the fetus via an attack on the mother, a crime, but instead, give the crime of attacking a pregnant woman a much harsher sentence than a normal assault and battery charge. Call the pregnant woman a protected class. Then, not only can the left not complain that it’s a backdoor into the abortion debate, but you also get to protect the fetuses that are younger than the abortion cutoff. Further, you get to protect women who are pregnant – the leading cause of death in pregnant woman is murder. Hell, you’ll even get the feminists voting for that one!

If they didn’t mean to make this a back door into the abortion debate, but actually want to protect the fetus, that’d totally be the way to do it. Pretend to care about the woman.

Most notably, South Dakota. Look it up. Kansas has also attempted this. South Carolina has passed similar legislation, and there are people trying to use it to ban abortion.

But honestly, what is wrong with my suggestion? Protect the fetus via protecting the woman? That way no one complains. I’m not understanding your disagreement (or your nastiness!) If the protection of the fetus is the goal, how does this fail?

Luna: maybe, just maybe, you should open your mind to the fact that maybe, just maybe, abortion is wrong. That being said, this bill specifically protects abortion. And, in the United States, Roe v. Wade had given abortion constitutional protection on a federal level, so I don’t know what you are talking about.

Wait a sec. I’m pregnant, and I sure as hell ain’t amongst the most vulnerable. Nor do I want “special” status. *$&% that! If someone attacked me and killed my fetus sure I’d want them charged. With aggravated assault for harming ME. Because that developing fetus is a part of ME.

What I don’t want, as a pregnant woman, is to be revered as a walking incubator. These kinds of laws dehumanize women by making their fetus more important than them in the eyes of the law. Sure its wrong to hurt a woman, but if she’s pregnant, thats just atrocious and maybe we should actually DO something about it now. I don’t want to be a slave to my fetus. I will do everything in my power to ensure that the babe born is healthy, loved and cared for. But when I am worth more only because I carry a potential child makes it wrong wrong wrong. These kinds of laws lead to those where the state owns your uterus and takes away our right to self-determination.

Some psycho who wishes me harm will not stop and go, hmmmm, I wonder if that woman has a fetus, I’d better not beat her to death and harm her potential human child because I might (but probably won’t) have to do more time. These laws don’t work. Furthermore, in the US, pregnant women are being charged for unfortunate lifestyle choices. I don’t want to be sued 20 years down the road for tripping and falling and harming my potential baby. Think it won’t happen? Think again.

Now that I am pregnant with a PLANNED child, I know how strongly it affects the body, and it has made me 1200% MORE supportive of the right to control your reproductive choice. If I had to go through this in an awful situation, I don’t know what I would do.

Want to help pregnant ladies? Get that stupid right-arsed gov’t of ours to give for funding to SOW and help women’s shelters out to prevent domestic violence that is usually the cause of death or harm to pregnant women and their feti. Thats only a start. But, preventing the harm in the first place instead of punishing the perpetrator would be oh-so-leftist-commipinkoislamofascist now, wouldn’t it?

I don’t disagree that abortion is wrong. Where did I say I did? I explained the viewpoint of people who do disagree with that point of view, just like you asked. Why in hell is everyone here so defensive?

I know what Roe. v. Wade does. I know that no state can totally ban abortion. But they can make it near on impossible after a certain point (and in the case of SD, not at all unless it puts the woman’s life in danger! Check it out. You can google as well as I can), and they used this kind of legislation to make those laws. I’m NOT arguing for or against abortion rights. I’m merely explaining why people fear this sort of legislation.

Rosie, I think we’re basically on the same page. More or less. :) But as a pregnant woman, you *are* more vulnerable – you are more likely to die by violence than any other way right now. My suggestion to make the pregnant woman a protected class isn’t because I think that it’ll prevent any of these deaths. I know better than to believe that stiffer penalties prevent crime. Just like I know that making the fetus a protected class won’t do any good in that direction either. But many people want punishments for killing the wanted fetus, the one people choose to have but then can’t because of the psycho bastard. I figure the way to handle that is to charge the S.O.B. for harming the woman – and moreso because she’s pregnant. Saves us from that possibility of being charged for accidentally falling down the stairs.

Ladies, I am shocked at your opposition to a law that would penalize the murder of your own child. My wife and I have had two children in the past three years, and if anyone had caused one of my wonderful little boys to die in utero, I would want that person punished to the fullest extent of the law, both for the harm done to my wife and for the harm done to my child. The absence of a penalty for the death of a wanted future-child would be a disgrace.

Rosie, your comment is full of hyperbole, bald assertions, and ridiculous relics of the long-discredited 1960s radical feminist movement. Nonetheless, I wish you nothing but the best as you approach the most wonderful, meaningful time of your life. God bless you and your growing family.

flaggman, I am shocked by your failure to understand that it’s not that we don’t want people punished if they hurt our fetus via assaulting us. (Frankly, I’m in favour of a little vigilante justice at times). What we don’t want is to lose our right to terminate a pregnancy. If you could protect my fetus without screwing with my right to end a pregnancy, I’d be all for it. And that, my friend, is why I’d really like to see, first of all, a lot of money going to help women in dangerous situations, and second, harsher punishments for people who assault pregnant women.

And yes, I believe it’s wrong to abort a fetus. But I don’t think a law preventing it is any better. Because abortion rates in countries where it is illegal are the same as in countries where it is legal. I’m pro-life enough to realize that x number of abortions + y number of deaths of women due to unsafe abortions > x number of abortions.

And also, I’d love to work to eliminate the need for it entirely. Make it so that birth control is free and easy to get. Make it so that adoption is easy and not stigmatized. Make it so that having and keeping a baby isn’t a major financial burden. And so on.

“flaggman, I am shocked by your failure to understand that it’s not that we don’t want people punished if they hurt our fetus via assaulting us. (Frankly, I’m in favour of a little vigilante justice at times).”

Since Epp’s bill fixes the loophole that prevents the punishment of someone killing a wanted fetus, then I don’t know what other conclusion you want me to make. And what does “vigilante justice” have to do with this argument? Surely you know that the definition of vigilante is justice OUTSIDE the law.

“What we don’t want is to lose our right to terminate a pregnancy. If you could protect my fetus without screwing with my right to end a pregnancy, I’d be all for it.”

Do you mean unlimited access to abortion, including partial-birth destruction? Even a vast majority of pro-choice supporters support limits to abortion. So you have to be specific: at what point does it stop being OK for a woman to end her pregnancy?

“I’d really like to see, first of all, a lot of money going to help women in dangerous situations,”

Every liberal’s solution: spend more money. Money doesn’t solve most problems, that’s why rich people are miserable and governments programs never accomplish their goals.

“and second, harsher punishments for people who assault pregnant women.”

Sure, everyone can agree on that one, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

“And yes, I believe it’s wrong to abort a fetus. But I don’t think a law preventing it is any better. Because abortion rates in countries where it is illegal are the same as in countries where it is legal. I’m pro-life enough to realize that x number of abortions + y number of deaths of women due to unsafe abortions > x number of abortions.”

Huh? I think you’re trying to say that a law restricting abortion would lead to more abortions. That makes no sense.

“And also, I’d love to work to eliminate the need for it entirely. Make it so that birth control is free and easy to get. Make it so that adoption is easy and not stigmatized. Make it so that having and keeping a baby isn’t a major financial burden. And so on.”

Free birth control dehumanizes sex. Adoption should be destigmantized, absolutely. But financial burden? In the long term, there’s nothing more financially beneficial than having children – both for an aging adult, and for society at large. The Conservative government is helping the financial burden on child-raising, so good on them.

From the States here and a very very very blue on at that. This law isn’t evil. The rhetoric of both sides is just that and fails all to often to pass the test of reality. I’ve known of cases of troubled deliveries which result in crash c-sections. The additional complications in this environment begets the question which life do you save ? Well of course you do your best to save both right ? My point is all parties at that point agree there are two lives. I wonder then why a woman with full intention to full term pregnancy,who takes her pre natal vitamins and everything else should be forced to accept no justice on behalf of the life she so honestly believes exists.

Lefties are juvenile. Hmmm. Really. All lefties Flaggman? Are you really intending on using the big brush and wipe all lefties with the juvenile tag? Really now you can’t be serious. What the hell is it with you righteous righters, wagging your oh so disapproving fingers? Funny enough, you apparently not so juvenile finger wagglers sometimes end up caught in mens bathrooms looking for anonymous sex or spending thousands on call girls after shouting with such religeous zeal. But I digress.

No Flaggman the only thing truly juvenile, is the lot of you righteous righters combing through cyberland looking for hapless souls who display just the sort of characteristics you imagine lefties to have, and pump yourselves up with zeal and loudly proclaim with great pomposity how loonie these lefties are. I call you bunch righteous righters, because I know some good people I respect as ‘right leaning’, and I don’t hear them insulting people with different opinions. I don’t hear them browbeating people with maybe, just maybe you’re wrong! Flaggman, grow up. We live in a democracy with differing opinions, and we also live in a world where there are wingnuts on both sides of the political spectrum. I think it takes some maturity to recognize that, no, perhaps respect, and to be able to move past that and on to productive debate dealing with important issues. Now I know you will say some insulting remark, troll, stalker, well why not juvenile since I’m a ‘leftie’, but I really don’t give a crap.
I thought what Luna commented was reasonable, and despite it perhaps being not what you believe, there’s no need to browbeat and condescend just because you believe your beliefs should be enforced on everybody else.

Luna’s a big girl, she can respond herself to my rebuttal if she likes. In the meantime, I stand by my post. Lefties, including you, are, by definition, juvenile. Leftism jives precisely with the adolescent mindset – that the self is the center of the universe, and that the rest of the world is stupid if they don’t follow worship MY genius.

Your last sentence – I think you’re trying to say that, because abortion is legal and we live in a democracy, that the situation is right and can never change. An assinine proposition – buddy.

Ah Flaggman. A man of of assumptions. My last sentence never said anything was right or wrong Neil. It is you, who feels the world revolves around him. It is your ideas, and opinions, that you feel you can jump up and down and scream that everyone should adhere to. I merely said that right now, in our democracy the majority has said it’s right, and that’s how it is right now. Simple!

You can yammer on all you wish about how juvenile the left is, I know, it makes you feel better. Even posting rubbish that someone has changed their political views, from left to right, and that somehow is GREAT news! You know what’s funny, I really don’t think anyone really gives a crap. Yet somehow, it is some sort of righteous victory for you, one to trumpet loudly. Yes juvenile eh? Sure you can call me or other leftists that all you like, but your incessant screaming about leftists belies who the real juvenile one is Neil. People change their views everyday, it’s really not news. And I hate to break it to you, but I really doubt there is a coffin for the left anytime soon for their to be nails hammered in. This whole right is righteous! And left is bad! hollering is the stuff of sandboxes and dinky toys Neil. And I’m surprised that someone who is as astute and passionate about issues as you seem to be would lower themselves to that kind of senseless trash.

Yammering, screaming, hollering, jumping up and down, senseless trash…there’s only one person here that fits that description. It’s certainly not the style of this blog, as any objective observer could surmise in about thirty seconds.

So on the one hand you’d like me to address your nonsense as if I was in court, but on the other, you use four-letter words. Such decorum.

Don’t assume that I don’t know about the attempted bans by telling me to look it up. I’m fully aware.

But I’m also aware that the mere existence of an Unborn Victims’ of Crime Act does not in itself automatically lead to a ban on abortions, or even support for such a ban. The pro-choicers who support Epp’s bill certainly understand the difference between the narrow scope of this bill and a ban on abortions.

In NO state where such a law that has been passed has there been a ban on abortions.

Not one.

Stop being hysterical.

Stop giving abusers a free pass because you want to hang your hat on a legal fiction that’s not worthy of the intelligence and scientific advancements of the day and age in which we live, let alone the basic human rights we claim to champion.

Stop leaving women who may be in crisis pregnancies to fend for themselves and the choices they have a right to make, regardless of the selfish people around them.

Stop contributing to a cover-up of the dramatically increased chances of violence against women who choose life for their unborn children by your baseless assertions.

I find it funny that radical feminist manipulators are first to find manipulations everywhere. Why is that??? Is it because manipulations and lies and deceptions served feminists so well for so long??? Is it that feminists foresee their own weapons being used against them???
Is mirror such a terrible thing to look into?? How is it that feminists judge Conservatives by their own standards of behaviour?? If cheating deceptions and lies are the new norms that all politicians and all ordinary Canadians should live by than feminist vigilance might as well be justified. We all live in a world of our own making and feminist hysteria over Unborn Victims of Crime Bill is the best evidence yet of total bankruptcy of moral and ethical standards of feminist movement.
Cheers,

"How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing, and fools hate knowledge?" - Proverbs 1:22

"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgement of faith in God and His works. - Frédéric Bastiat, The Law (1850)